Bad porn only exists where regulations aren't in place. Put those regulations in place, make it a safe, healthy environment, and you won't get bad porn anymore. I blame the government for turning a blind eye and wanting to have nothing to do with an industry they could clean up, make proper and save than anything else.

Because as much as some people hate it, despise it, and wish for it to disappear... so long as we have sex for the sheer pleasure of having sex, porn will always exist. The best we can do is manage it so that it's a clean, safe and healthy environment for those that go into the business.

so honestly i'm wondering, does this "female friendly porn" exist and live up to the title

what does it entail and what about it makes it more "female friendly"

There exists... attempts. But not because the porn industry feels the bads about itself and wants to redirect its influence along time. Fuck no.

The attempts exists because the average porn consumer are mainly males and they are lefting out a gross percentage of demographic. That's it, 50% of people, and doubling the sales is enough to wet the pants of any kind of film producer.

Take care I am not saying that women don't see porn! But women see porn "designed" (and how! ¬.¬) to males. The industry has years trying to obtain a formula that appeals to female too, whit no success.

As far I know, they have tried using female porn directors, polls, not degrading scenes (like no facials, no bitchslapping, no spit, no... treating the female partner as sex doll or furniture, lol) a storyline that stand by itself, atractive male partner (instead the traditional I-have-a-big-penis-and-neanderthal-forehead-matching)...

And so far, they can't say they achieved it properly. Damn women and their confusing sexuality!

My point here is, although female (kinda) friendly porn exists, it has failed appealing to women. And it failed as a product too, the true cause of its existence._________________Be mellow
Be compassionate

Very odd to imaging a little girl's voice reading off the phrases "First Time Gang Bang" and "Forced Teens."

Really, the only truly "bad" item on Squig's list is "Forced Teens" because forced is by definition non-consensual. The "teens" part is too vague to outright condemn; there's no law against teens having sex with other teens (in most jurisdictions, anyway), and while I myself have never made any effort to locate images of teens having sex with each other, I wouldn't go so far as to label people who like looking at such images as downright "sick." Being a teenager doesn't even necessarily mean it's illegal to have sex with an adult, depending on the age of consent in any given jurisdiction.

Besides, we have no idea how old Squig is. Maybe he's a teen.

I checked, just to be sure, and Wikipedia defines "gang bang" as "a situation in which a person engages in consensual sex acts with several individuals at the same time" (emphasis added). That means that all of the individuals, men and women, are consenting. So it's something that can be "appreciated" by both genders. I guess.

The other two items don't say anything about consent either way, but there's no reason to simply presume that they depict women being forced into committing sexual acts. Okay, yeah, I myself personally as an individual have a little trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that some women enjoy "receiving facials" in this context, but what the heck do I know? I find it equally difficult to wrap my mind around the idea that some men enjoy "giving facials" in this context. So what? I'm not at all inclined to judge people on things like that.

We the readers are no more necessarily expected to consider Curly's perspective as "right" than we are expected to consider Squig's perspective as "right." They're two imperfect flawed characters engaged in discussion, that's all.

Perhaps you could tell me in exactly which ways I don't know I'm talking about. I'm always ready to learn.

Good luck with that, Ronald; Monkey has yet to put up on the times that I asked him to substantiate his claims of my ignorance. I'm wondering if maybe he cherishes his position of superiority to those of us who "don't know what we're talking about" too much to jeopardize it by sharing any infinitesimal tidbit of his great wisdom?_________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning

I'm wondering if maybe [Monkey] cherishes his position of superiority to those of us who "don't know what we're talking about" too much to jeopardize it by sharing any infinitesimal tidbit of his great wisdom?

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:

Yeah i do.

Well, thank you for that insight! I hope that someday you can feel secure enough in yourself to actually back up the things you say about what others may or may not know. Until that day, though, I certainly feel no need to pay heed to your words, and I hope Ronald--and in fact every contributor to these forums who's willing to command respect by at least attempting to substantiate his or her claims--similarly sees how baseless your posts are and feels free to ignore them as the noise that they are._________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning

uhhh
for one thing, I still don't see how female-drawn (or written) porn is not female-friendly

I won't say anything more in this thread, bye~

When it perpetrates the braazers model of exploitation? Scenarios like pretending to be immigration to blackmail illegal immigrants into sex acts?

Whether or not the treatment of the actresses in porn is appropriate and above board, the fantasies and scenarios they depict tend toward the exploitation and degradation of women. This in turn contributes to a culture that treats women as objects of pleasure rather than people and individuals, particularly among young males who have likely received a larger portion of their sexual experiences from porn than they have from actual experiences._________________

uhhh
for one thing, I still don't see how female-drawn (or written) porn is not female-friendly

I won't say anything more in this thread, bye~

When it perpetrates the braazers model of exploitation? Scenarios like pretending to be immigration to blackmail illegal immigrants into sex acts?

Whether or not the treatment of the actresses in porn is appropriate and above board, the fantasies and scenarios they depict tend toward the exploitation and degradation of women. This in turn contributes to a culture that treats women as objects of pleasure rather than people and individuals, particularly among young males who have likely received a larger portion of their sexual experiences from porn than they have from actual experiences.

People shouldn't get their moral/social compass from fiction. It's not about women in porn, it's possibly about everything. Cop who disobeys the law to brings 'actual' justice. Kid who wanders off house to discover 'magical' land. Person who falls in love and follows around like a lunatic another person they met five minutes ago. If someone were to take ANY of these and try to implement them into their actual life the results would probably be really problematic-(as shown by many every day examples, with how to treat women being an obvious one). But according to my preferences, the focus should be more on teaching people not to take examples/guidance about what to do in life from works of fiction, aimed for entertainment -especially for mass-produced-quickly-consumed entertainment- instead of banning these works of fiction. Because that would seem too 1984-ic to me. Other people's preferences might vary though, no problem with that...